Socioeconomic position and body composition in childhood in high- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and narrative synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The relation between socioeconomic position (SEP) and obesity measured by body mass index (BMI), a measure of weight for height, has been extensively reviewed in children, showing consistent associations between disadvantaged SEP and higher BMI in high-income countries (HICs) and lower BMI in middle-income countries (MICs). Fat mass (FM), a more accurate measure of adiposity, and fat-free mass (FFM) are not captured by BMI, but have been shown to track from childhood to adulthood, and be important for cardiovascular health and functional outcomes in later life. It is not clear whether body composition is associated with SEP. We systematically reviewed the association between SEP and body composition in childhood. METHODS: A systematic review was carried out following PRISMA guidelines. The protocol was pre-registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019119937). Original studies in the English language, which examined the association between SEP and body composition in childhood, were included. An electronic search of three databases was conducted. Two independent reviewers carried out screening, data extraction and quality assessment. Due to heterogeneity in results, a narrative synthesis was conducted. Heterogeneity in findings according to SEP, sex, body composition measure and country income level was investigated. RESULTS: 50 papers were included, the majority from HICs. No papers were from low-income countries. Disadvantage in childhood was associated with greater FM and lower FFM in HICs, but with lower FM and lower FFM in MICs. When measures of FFM indexed to height were used there was no evidence of associations with SEP. In HICs, more studies reported associations between disadvantaged SEP and higher FM among girls comparative to boys. CONCLUSIONS: Inequalities in FM are evident in HICs and, in the opposite direction, in MICs and follow similar trends to inequalities for BMI. Inequalities in height are likely important in understanding inequalities in FFM.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.070 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".